Cantwell is an idiot. Possibly a mole. Maybe a fascist? Don’t really care about him.
Larken Rose however, is an admired speaker and philosopher.
Why was Larken concerned about Cantwell’s removal? What did Cantwell do wrong according to Porcfest ?
Samm

I don’t know details personally, but my understanding is that Cantwell was banned for advocating using violence against cops. Larken Rose was not banned but decided not to buy any more tickets to the festival because of the FSP’s decision to ban Cantwell. I remember he was at Roger’s during the 2015 Porcfest.

Revolutionary action against the state and fascism don’t mix. Cantwell has (supposedly) supported both. Can’t trust the guy’s views anymore. That’s for sure. Who can you trust within the “freedom” movement ? Seems to me that Larken Rose of all people would be of the highest importance to FSP and Porcfest and the Shire for that matter. He’s probably the biggest freedom advocate I’ve ever heard speak. And he can do it in a simplistic fashion.
How in the world did Larken Rose, one of the best messengers of truth and freedom lose interest in one of the most concentrated areas of “Liberty Minded People” ? I think this is a question that deserves attention within the Shire.
Samm

@Britton, I appreciate where you are coming from. I too was confused initially by the language in their press release - they’d used some political terms “no longer invited”, that’s why I asked Matt Philips specifically via PM if I was PROHIBITED from FSP events. He confirmed I was prohibited from being on the property. Would you like me to dig up the chat logs? I’m not what it will take to convince you I was prohibited from the events.

As of yet, no one from the FSP has invited me or Free Talk Live back to their events. I am aware that Rodger Paxton has been fighting to try to get this to happen.

@ShireDude, I don’t consider posting a message on a web site to which I don’t go as an invitation. I’m not hard to reach. I have told Rodger that I’d go were I invited, as I don’t hold a grudge.

However, there will be more backlash against the FSP by my haters if they turn around on this issue, guaranteed, which is surely one reason why they’ve been discussing for nearly a year now, since @paxlibertas was brought on the board.

Britton: “I don’t know details personally, but my understanding is that Cantwell was banned for advocating using violence against cops. Larken Rose was not banned but decided not to buy any more tickets to the festival because of the FSP’s decision to ban Cantwell. I remember he was at Roger’s during the 2015 Porcfest.”

Did I hear somewhere that Ian’s views as a pacifist had leverage on convincing FSP to “not invite” famous Anarchist speaker and philosopher Larken Rose ? I along with many others would be highly interested in hearing Larken’s latest views at Porcfest.
Samm

I think Penguin made a good point above too: [quote=“penguin, post:2, topic:10772”]
“Where people have upset about past kicks over people spouting unpopular views some of those views were at least violent-or some would argue so anyway. While the FSP is a private organization it set a bad precedent for a group that is supposed to be advocating freedom. Lead by example they say. That means you don’t have to agree with someone, but you will let that person speak and banning people goes against what a good leadership advocating freedom should be doing.”

[/quote]
You gotta support freedom of speech at a freedom festival. Don’t you think ? Bring back Larken.
Samm

I am convinced that Matt Philips told you that you were prohibited from attending Porcfest. However, it’s also been communicated to you that you are prohibited from smoking cannabis, rolling through stop signs, and leaving the tray down when the plane is taking off.

The latest statement from the director of the FSP was an invitation to buy tickets sandwiched between statements that you’re not banned or prohibited. So I’m curious if the Matt’s old statements overrides Rachel’s latest. Does Rachel have masters to obey, or is this entirely her shot to make?

I think she’s trying to split the hair this way: you aren’t formally invited to attend and broadcast from the event, but you may purchase a ticket and broadcast from there anyway. That is perhaps the only way to appease those who want no association with you and those who want you back at the festival.

The latest statement from the director of the FSP was an invitation to buy tickets sandwiched between statements that you’re not banned or prohibited. So I’m curious if the Matt’s old statements overrides Rachel’s latest. Does Rachel have masters to obey, or is this entirely her shot to make?

Again, nowhere in her statement does Rachel make any mention of Ian. She says only “FTL at large”.

Yes, of course, Rachel has “masters to obey”. She’s employed by the Board of Directors of Free State Project, Inc and, as such, cannot overturn their edicts as she sees fit. That’s how corporations work: the Board of Directors creates policy and the Executive Director oversees day-to-day implementation of those policies.

The Board of Directors very specifically banned banned Ian, by name, from attending FSP-hosted events. PorcFest is “the flagship annual event of the Free State Project”. So, he’s pretty clearly banned from attending. The statements of any particular employee, even the Executive Director, do not change corporate policy, regardless of what you think they’re trying to do.

If Rachel, you, Rodger Paxton, or anyone else wants Ian to be free to attend PorcFest (should he so desire) their necessary course of action is to have the current Board of Directors revoke the ban they issued two years ago.

@Britton, the prohibitions you mentioned (stop sign, smoking, cannabis) are state prohibitions. As @Aahz pointed out, this is a matter of private property and the tenant (the FSP) telling me I’m not welcome on that property (Roger’s Campground). I am respecting that request.

Now, perhaps that can change. As I said, I don’t hold a grudge, but I know Mark Edge is still super butthurt. Based on what he told me, I expect he will not attend even if invited.

We’ve still got two months, so we’ll see if anything changes. There are some efforts being made by Rodger - you’ll just have to wait and see.

Either way, I’m definitely going to Forkfest, and so are what sounds like an increase over last year’s event.

this is a matter of private property and the tenant (the FSP) telling me I’m not welcome on that property (Roger’s Campground). I am respecting that request.

You are confusing porcfest and Rodger’s campground.

The FSP isn’t a tenant to all of Rodger’s campground. Most attendees are also tenants, so they could surely invite you to their campsite. Rodger’s campground would also allow you to be a tenant. The FSP can ban you from their festival, but they can’t ban you from the campground unless they rent it for their exclusive use.

If the FSP requested you leave Rogers before porkfest started, you are being a gentleman to respect the request. There is no obligation, and I am sure Rodgers campground would much rather have you there spending money. They need all the help they can get.

grrr this “new forum software” that was supposed to take us into the promised land… is refusing to let me keyword search this thread the way I would search an NHfree.com thread or a document. Change without backward compatability is not helpful!

The last time I went, they had volunteers at the entrance to stop people from driving on unless they were registered for porcfest. Logistically, it would be relatively easy to continue hanging out around the campground without buying the porcfest ticket if you’re already there when it starts.
I plan to not pay the FSP to continue hanging out at Rogers if I want to stay a few more days as more people will be there I haven’t seen for a few years but of course Ian has a show to run and likely would want to go back to the studio to do that anyways. His Choice.